27-inch iMac lovers will have to wait until January for their fix

Those with early preorders are still hoping to see theirs in December.

The 27-inch version of those shiny new iMacs won't be shipping to (most) customers until January of 2013, Apple revealed today. The machines have been available for preorder as of November 30, as Apple promised last month, but a definitive shipping date was still up in the air until Friday, when Apple's online store showed they would begin shipping after the holiday season is over. The 21.5-inch version, however, is already shipping.

When Apple began taking preorders for the new iMacs, the availability of the 27-inch version was already spotty. Apple originally said the machines would ship 2-3 weeks from the order date, and according to the Apple Store confirmation pages of a couple Ars staffers, their initial preorders of the 27-inch iMac are still expected to ship between December 21 and 28.

But those showing up today to place an order are greeted with a vague "January" projection, making some early buyers anxious that their orders might be pushed back to sometime in January as well. But Apple told us in November that the 27-inch iMac would indeed begin shipping in December, so if you're one of those who placed an order early on, it seems likely your order will still arrive within the Apple Store's projected time frame.

In the meantime, you can get your ultrathin Mac fix by reading our just-published review of the 21.5-inch iMac. Apple declined to comment on the 27-inch iMac's ship date.

33 Reader Comments

There are too many performance and upgradability trade-offs in the name of thinness in the new iMac. Since I'm not wanting the 27" screen, when I replace my 2009 iMac it will be with a Mac Mini. At least I can upgrade the RAM myself.

There are too many performance and upgradability trade-offs in the name of thinness in the new iMac. Since I'm not wanting the 27" screen, when I replace my 2009 iMac it will be with a Mac Mini. At least I can upgrade the RAM myself.

I have the 2012 mini with dual ssd and 16gb memory with dual dell 24".

There are too many performance and upgradability trade-offs in the name of thinness in the new iMac. Since I'm not wanting the 27" screen, when I replace my 2009 iMac it will be with a Mac Mini. At least I can upgrade the RAM myself.

The irony is that you can upgrade the RAM in the 27" iMac.

I am sorely tempted to nab a Mac mini + 27" LCD for significantly cheaper than a 27" iMac.

I'd love to buy an iMac, but I can't get my head round the fact that a built-in screen seems such a waste... my current Mac mini is looong in the tooth, maybe the way forwards is as many have already found: new Mac mini and Thunderbolt display.

I'd love to buy an iMac, but I can't get my head round the fact that a built-in screen seems such a waste... my current Mac mini is looong in the tooth, maybe the way forwards is as many have already found: new Mac mini and Thunderbolt display.

It also may much cheaper on the long run.

PS: My first post after many years of reading...

You do realize that the iMac can operate as a standalone screen, right?

I've been looking to upgrade for some time, and the day these were announced I evaluated the difference relative the 2011 model. Gain a little speed and USB3, lose the optical and FireWire. (And a few other lesser details…)

After about fifteen minutes of deliberation, I instead bought a refurbed 2011 model with internal SSD, saving $600 in the process. It also runs 10.6 if I really need to. I don't regret it one bit.

You do realize that the iMac can operate as a standalone screen, right?

I think the issue there is the exact opposite of what you thought it was...

How so? But an iMac, when it gets too slow turn it into a display and hook up a new Mac mini to it instead of throwing it out.

The only reason to buy a Thunderbolt Display and Mac mini is to save $200 if you get the base Mac mini.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but although you can use an iMac for it's screen, you still have to turn the thing on. Which means it's still running as a computer in the background and at that point you have two computers running. Which to me makes absolutely no sense.

The problem with the Mac Mini is the lack of a discreet graphics card. Even Photoshop unloads processing to supported graphics cards. So in the end, my options are Mac Pros, MacBook Pros and iMacs. I'm waiting for the 2013 Mac Pro and then deciding.

The problem with the Mac Mini is the lack of a discreet graphics card. Even Photoshop unloads processing to supported graphics cards. So in the end, my options are Mac Pros, MacBook Pros and iMacs. I'm waiting for the 2013 Mac Pro and then deciding.

I use Photoshop along with CS6 Master as well as FCPX, and it runs great on a new mini with 16GB memory.

It's kind of funny how something like adhesive is making me less likely to stick with Apple...

Previous iMac may have taken more skill to work on than your average PC. Gluing it together is just a new level of PITA. I know I am going to be digging in the guts to put in a hard Drive after it is out of warranty and I am not sure if I want to deal with glue either.

I've looked at the service manuals for the 2012 systems and the "glue" is actually a high adhesive foam double stick tape. You open one of these beasts for service by using a specialized rotary cutter (like for fabric) between the display and the aluminum case that cuts the tape's foam center then you clean and peel the adhesive off both sides with alcohol, do your repair/upgrade and put new foam adhesive tape on one side, peel the backing and slap that sucker shut again. (After careful alignment...)

Although they certainly won't be as easy to open and re-close multiple times like a Mac Pro, if just opening it once in its lifetime to upgrade an HD or add RAM is keeping you from buying it, I wouldn't let that stop you. Folks will figure out reasonably easy third party ways to open and reseal these by the time you need to replace the HD...

I'd love to buy an iMac, but I can't get my head round the fact that a built-in screen seems such a waste... my current Mac mini is looong in the tooth, maybe the way forwards is as many have already found: new Mac mini and Thunderbolt display.

It also may much cheaper on the long run.

PS: My first post after many years of reading...

I agree. The display is one of the few computer components that can easily last through multiple systems. I'm on my 3rd computer with my Dell 2001FP and it's still going strong (knock on wood). I suppose all-in-ones look cool, but I don't understand why anyone would sacrifice capability, upgradability, and expandability in the name of size and thinness for a device that is going to be stationary 99% of the time (I have the same issue with the trend towards razor-thin edge lit LED TVs - it's a TV set, it's huge anyway, why does anyone care if it's 1.5" thick vs 4" thick if you could get better picture quality from a thicker set with a full array backlight).

I was hoping Tim Cook would be a bit more pragmatic than Jobs was and would lead Apple to release a tower form-factor computer with a single socket CPU mobo slotted in between the iMac and the Mac Pro. Even if it were priced the same as the iMac, came without a display, and with similar specs (but including an optical drive and a decent dedicated graphics card, and used desktop components instead of laptop parts) I could see a real market for it.

I've looking into using an iMac as an expensive monitor and it's indeed possible (something I didn't know), but it isn't flawless and quite restrictive (only works using the mythical male Mini DisplayPort to male Mini DisplayPort). Also, it only delays the issue for one cycle, and in a few years' time I'll have the same problem. And there is a limit on how many monitors can be made useful at home... no matter how geek one is

Selling the iMac for financing a new iMac sounds great, but requires a dynamic second hand marketplace which isn't the case yet in Spain (Macs are widely know and increasing awareness by the minute, but still mostly used either by professionals or high-income families, neither tend to buy used equipment).

I'll have to study those "twin 24inch Dell setups" so many of you talk about in Ars and other tech forums. They rub me right, and should be awesome for coding...

You do realize that the iMac can operate as a standalone screen, right?

I think the issue there is the exact opposite of what you thought it was...

How so? But an iMac, when it gets too slow turn it into a display and hook up a new Mac mini to it instead of throwing it out.

The only reason to buy a Thunderbolt Display and Mac mini is to save $200 if you get the base Mac mini.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but although you can use an iMac for it's screen, you still have to turn the thing on. Which means it's still running as a computer in the background and at that point you have two computers running. Which to me makes absolutely no sense.

Not to mention that you can only plug a computer with a Thunderbolt output (read : only a recent Mac) into one of those iMac (unless that's changed from the previous generation); regular Displayport won't work. So it makes for a really limited display too...

There are too many performance and upgradability trade-offs in the name of thinness in the new iMac. Since I'm not wanting the 27" screen, when I replace my 2009 iMac it will be with a Mac Mini. At least I can upgrade the RAM myself.